Why doesn't the Captain warn DuGalle about Duran's treachery?

[FanaticTemplar]

Same concept I've been reiterating all thread, that just because I can buy a Mercedes on credit even while broke, it doesn't make sense to extrapolate that to me having my own car show in 4 years.

And the same thing I've reiterated all thread is that asserting something doesn't make it true. You still have no basis for your fanfiction.

No, it doesn't. If the game felt the need to distinguish that it was larger or smaller, then you could make a claim. If the game says nothing, then you have nothing.

You know what? Sure, let's go with that.

Here's the epilogue:

Two questions:
1) If you "understand that all else being equal, Mengsk will rebuild his Dominion", why not the protoss? Says so right there. Yet in all of SC2 they're so glorious that they can't even bother making a single important appearance. Hell, their High Executor can't even defend one of their planets from a terran rebel group and their one battlecruiser.

So? Until proof of the contrary, I do indeed understand that the Protoss have been rebuilding their once glorious civilisation. In Brood War they were refugees seeking asylum on Shakuras, now they're colonising worlds again, and they've got the Golden Armada thing, doesn't sound like they've been reduced to Sons of Korhal status, which is how apparently you understand it.

Stealing leadership from the Confederacy isn't the same as building an empire. That's like taking credit for building all of America upon being elected President.

But after Korhal got wasted by the UED, then the zerg, then the zerg again, that's a different story. Arcturus basically squandered what he inherited from the Confederacy.

So, losing your capitol world entirely, as well as 8 of the other 12 human worlds = a completely intact empire that Mengsk can just steal away in months.
But losing your capitol world (possibly, all we know is that Mengsk's base camp and forces on the planet were destroyed, but let's assume for your benefit that Korhal was destroyed as utterly as Tarsonis) alone = irreparably crippled empire.

What part of losing eight extra worlds improves the situation in your reality?

Explain why anybody in their right mind would side with his failure of a fledgling government at that point over tried and tested factions that stood the test of time like Umoja or the KMC?

The KMC has failed every time it has been tested, and the Umojan Protectorate has never been tested.

If the game felt the need to [establish Umoja and the KMC as viable power groups], then you could make a claim. If the game says nothing, then you have nothing.

Why hasn't Artanis rebuilt the Protoss' glorious civilization as promised by the infallible epilogue? Because the epilogue listed character motivations, not future facts. It's a double standard. You're trying to twist evidence where none exists to fit your position.

Evidence that Mengsk would rebuild the Dominion: the epilogue says that Mengsk is taking his fleet to plan the reconstruction of the Dominion.
Evidence that Mengsk is crippled and cannot rebuild the Dominion: Gradius wishes really hard.

Yeah, I'm on much firmer ground than you are.

Besides, the Dominion didn't really feel that strong to me after having taken over the reigns of the Confederacy what with all the Terran worlds still being wasted and what power they did show (through Duke's anemic displays) was quite ineffectual. We only had Mengsk's propaganda speech to go on.

Mengsk, as of the end of Sc1/start of BW, is only considered a major threat to the UED at that specific current time. Considering Mengsk's also the first step in their plan of gaining more traction in the sector, that makes sense that they should focus on him first. It's not my fault that you felt that the UED's focus on Mengsk gave you the impression that the Dominion were really strong to begin with.

Ok, so you're saying that the Dominion was always irrelevant. And since the UED considered them such a threat, that presumably means that the UED was also irrelevant. So we're left with a setting where nothing is relevant except the Zerg. That would seem to be a problem to me.

Eh, I'm not that upset about Mengsk. Just saying that planning doesn't constitute as hard evidence that he can/did do it.

Much stronger than the evidence that it is impossible for him to do it.

Given that Mengsk bends so easily in the face of a light breeze as shown in BW, one can hardly be blamed for not having faith in his actual ability to come back in a significant way. The "Zerg retconning of their defeat in BW" is only readily apparent when the cerebrates appear on Shakuras and being shown to be generally OP from that point on. Before that, Escape from Aiur acknowledges the epilogue of Sc1 fairly well, I think.

I don't. The Protoss are driven from their world by the threat of extinction. That doesn't sound like the victory in the epilogue to me.

The thing is, it's hard to know what to take into account at all. It also says in the BW epilogue that we don't hear from Raynor since, but we invariably do because he goes straight to attacking Mengsk and then steadily lose throughtout the next 4 years.

Yes?

Raynor is forevermore a rebel and yet that does nothing to crimp his character development according to you. Being of a particular status does not necessarily relegate one's character to pointless stagnation.

Kerrigan keeps getting infested demindcontrolled deinfested reinfested and that does sound like stagnation to me.

Mengsk was already an antagonist to Raynor and Kerrigan in Rebel Yell

He really wasn't. He doesn't even make his heel turn until after the climax. Rebel Yell was setting up Mengsk as an antagonist.

he's talked up as being formidable but he really isn't. It all seems pretty samey to me.

Why do you think he's talked up as being formidable, if he really isn't?

Anyone who thinks they know what is best and acts on behalf of everyone is showing disdain to those very people and are doing it just as much (or most definitely, more) for themselves as they are for others. I can make that judgement of both Mengsk and Ozymandias. How they rationalise it in their own heads is another matter. As I said, I can understand how a character reasons without having to sympathise with them.

This sounds like you're using a much vaguer answer than you previously were.

Mengsk is predictable as a character now. He revealed himself to be a self-serving a-hole despite his rhetoric and everyone (the audience I mean) seems to have latched onto that. BW goes on to show this selfishness plus the fact that he is now also inept. What more is there really to see?

You're dodging the question.

I think we've drifted off topic a long time ago. I've kind of lost my train of thought in the intervening days too, so I'm not sure which particular issue you want me to clarify...

Well, what do you think you're arguing then?

[Turalyon]

Ok, so you're saying that the Dominion was always irrelevant. And since the UED considered them such a threat, that presumably means that the UED was also irrelevant. So we're left with a setting where nothing is relevant except the Zerg. That would seem to be a problem to me.

Insofar as the Terrans were hardly relevant in the events that was Sc1 in the first place. Incidentally, didn't you identify this as being a valid criticism of the Terrans in Sc1 in your big review?

Much stronger than the evidence that it is impossible for him to do it.

I've never claimed impossibility of him doing it, just that there's room for varied interpretation.

I don't. The Protoss are driven from their world by the threat of extinction. That doesn't sound like the victory in the epilogue to me.

Read that epilogue: "...their victory cost them all but their lives" and "Aiur was left nothing more than a smouldering ruin". Sure they won, but it was a victory with a severe cost (or, a phrryic one if you prefer) which would mean that Protoss would need some time and place to recover - so, why not Shakuras? "The Zerg Swarms were scattered and broken" doesn't mean the Zerg were rendered completely inert and harmless. Escape from Aiur pays heed to all this.

Yes?

Just saying that you what you classify as hard evidence for one particular instance in that epilogue doesn't really hold much weight when in another instance of that same prologue it is not hard evidence as it turns out not to be in WoL (with the example being given was Raynor not being heard from again).

Kerrigan keeps getting infested demindcontrolled deinfested reinfested and that does sound like stagnation to me.

Do people complain about Batman being always "Batman" (or any other given superhero) as the character stagnating? He would've disappeared long ago if it was. It depends on the actual writing in the end.

There's nothing inherently wrong with her being reinfested really since one could make an interesting story about how different she could be this time or even that she is not that much different from the initial infestation. As long as there is an illusion of forward momentum, being brought back to a previous role doesn't necessarily make it bad. Instead, it's a worthy challenge to make it more interesting by trying to give the audience a different perspective. If one is not willing to do that, the character should be dropped. As it is, the main characters in Sc2 are just spinning their wheels and moving nowhere.

He really wasn't. He doesn't even make his heel turn until after the climax. Rebel Yell was setting up Mengsk as an antagonist.

Just because it isn't revealed until the end that he's eeevillll, doesn't mean that he was not actively working against Kerrigan and Raynor's interests the whole time.

Why do you think he's talked up as being formidable, if he really isn't?

Do I really need to explain this? It's the same reason he's a Master Propagandist when he really isn't. It's all just superficial informed attributes.

This sounds like you're using a much vaguer answer than you previously were.

What don't you understand? Those two characters are all about taking it upon themselves to do things for what they think is best for everyone. The core belief of one who thinks that way means that they do not really trust "everyone" (or anyone) to be able to help themselves - hence disdain for everyone.

You're dodging the question.

No, I'm clarifying my answer. We can guess how Mengsk in WoL will act based on what we of him in SC1 and BW. The way he does actually turn out in Sc2 goes on to prove it.

Well, what do you think you're arguing then?

I have no clue what specific area you want my position on. You said this Mengsk stuff in WoL is off-topic, so I didn't know whether you wanted me to talk about that or the stuff in BW.

All I can really say is that it's not that unreasonable for people to think that Mengsk's position in WoL as being somewhat surprising.

[Gradius]

So? Until proof of the contrary, I do indeed understand that the Protoss have been rebuilding their once glorious civilisation. In Brood War they were refugees seeking asylum on Shakuras, now they're colonising worlds again, and they've got the Golden Armada thing, doesn't sound like they've been reduced to Sons of Korhal status, which is how apparently you understand it.

In Brood War they destroyed a big chunk of the zerg swarm on Shakuras. In Brood War, they went around doing stuff (Artanis at Omega, Zeratul on Char, etc). You say that they're colonizing planets as if that's some massive achievement. Well no crap, that's the logical conclusion of 4 years of recovery, unlike Arcturus becoming the greatest terran power in the sector after getting so irrevocably decimated in BW.

In SC2, the protoss did absolutely nothing of value militarily. If the Golden Armada meant anything, it'd have been deployed at literally any time. After the swarm was fractured and broken would have been great!

doesn't sound like they've been reduced to Sons of Korhal status, which is how apparently you understand it.

Because:
1) The epilogue doesn't make them sound like complete losers the way Arcturus does.
2) Their string of defeats isn't as large as Arcturus's. The protoss are more powerful that Arcturus.
3) The main protoss body is unified. There is nobody else to fill the vacuum, and they'd have improved no matter what. Arcturus has other terran factions to contend with, as well as other people that should have usurped him.

So, losing your capitol world entirely, as well as 8 of the other 12 human worlds = a completely intact empire that Mengsk can just steal away in months.

When did I say completely intact? I said it's an empire he inherited from someone else. It's more than he had when it was the Sons of Korhal.

But losing your capitol world (possibly, all we know is that Mengsk's base camp and forces on the planet were destroyed, but let's assume for your benefit that Korhal was destroyed as utterly as Tarsonis) alone = irreparably crippled empire.

The UED also controlled all his colonies. I never said his empire was irreparably crippled, I said he's in a terrible position.

What part of losing eight extra worlds improves the situation in your reality?

What kind of backwards logic is this supposed to be? Did you ever hear me say the Dominion is on par with the Confederacy?

The KMC has failed every time it has been tested, and the Umojan Protectorate has never been tested.

The KMC repelled a zerg invasion in BW. And given Mengsk's vast string of military defeats, they're in a way better position. From the POV of the average citizen, I'd rather side with a faction that hasn't been attacked by zerg either (Umoja).

Evidence that Mengsk would rebuild the Dominion: the epilogue says that Mengsk is taking his fleet to plan the reconstruction of the Dominion.

Vague character motivations listed in an epilogue isn't evidence of anything, no matter how much you wish it to be. The protoss have improved because it's been 4 years, but Artanis hasn't rebuilt the protoss's glorious civilization in SC2 as promised.

Evidence that Mengsk is crippled and cannot rebuild the Dominion: Gradius wishes really hard.

Wrong again: http://sclegacy.com/forums/showthrea...l=1#post182585

Yeah, I'm on much firmer ground than you are.

Still not sure you actually believe that. Here's your "evidence" again:

With his rag-tag fleet beaten and crippled,
Arcturus Mengsk fled back to Korhal to lick
his wounds and plan the reconstruction of his
Terran Dominion...

Artanis and the Protoss survivors returned
to Shakuras to begin rebuilding their once
glorious civilization...

The epilogue made it a point to note how screwed over Mengsk is and how hard rebuilding will be for him. This is consistent with him being removed from power by Kerrigan on Korhal, and then using his last reserves at Omega. The epilogue implies that he will use whatever little political clout he has left to try to make something of himself again. SC shows a consistent downgrade in his power. The fact that you think it's ok for him to domineer over all other terran factions in SC2, invade and capture Char, etc. is mind-boggling. This is why there were so many complaints of "it's almost like BW never happened" when WoL first came out.

Look at the epilogue again and ask yourself which of the two are going to be a major power in the sector, because it sure as hell doesn't sound like the first guy! Yet remind me what the protoss accomplished in SC2 militarily again? Oh, that's right nothing. When you finally make the connection between that and the fact that we're complaining about Mengsk and not the protoss, you'll understand our argument a bit better.

[FanaticTemplar]

Insofar as the Terrans were hardly relevant in the events that was Sc1 in the first place. Incidentally, didn't you identify this as being a valid criticism of the Terrans in Sc1 in your big review?

That was narrative relevance, not military relevance. You'll recall that at the time I wrote that review, I thought that Humanity was being set up as the stronger faction following the Protoss and Zerg mutual devastation at the end of StarCraft.

I've never claimed impossibility of him doing it, just that there's room for varied interpretation.

Except StarCraft II makes it quite clear what happened. So unless there's reason to believe that this was a retcon, I don't see what we're arguing here.

Read that epilogue: "...their victory cost them all but their lives" and "Aiur was left nothing more than a smouldering ruin". Sure they won, but it was a victory with a severe cost (or, a phrryic one if you prefer) which would mean that Protoss would need some time and place to recover - so, why not Shakuras? "The Zerg Swarms were scattered and broken" doesn't mean the Zerg were rendered completely inert and harmless. Escape from Aiur pays heed to all this.

Perhaps you should read it. "...their victory cost them all but their lives" means that they had two things: they were victorious and they were alive. Brood War states that they must abandon Aiur - the very thing which they spent the entirety of StarCraft fighting for - or die, in other words they do not have victory, and trying to achieve it will mean that they will not be alive. How is that consistent with the epilogue?

Just saying that you what you classify as hard evidence for one particular instance in that epilogue doesn't really hold much weight when in another instance of that same prologue it is not hard evidence as it turns out not to be in WoL (with the example being given was Raynor not being heard from again).

You're demonstrating that Raynor's presence is a retcon. I'm not contesting this. It has nothing to do with Mengsk.

Just because it isn't revealed until the end that he's eeevillll, doesn't mean that he was not actively working against Kerrigan and Raynor's interests the whole time.

He was clearly working against Raynor's interests when he freed him from that Confederate prison ship, yes. You're fishing here. Mengsk was not the primary antagonist of Rebel Yell, and you know this full well.

Do I really need to explain this? It's the same reason he's a Master Propagandist when he really isn't. It's all just superficial informed attributes.

You're the one who said you had no idea whether the writers intended for Mengsk to appear incompetent, and I'm just helping you find an answer. Why would the writers provide informed attributes about Mengsk's competence if they intended to make him appear incompetent?

What don't you understand? Those two characters are all about taking it upon themselves to do things for what they think is best for everyone. The core belief of one who thinks that way means that they do not really trust "everyone" (or anyone) to be able to help themselves - hence disdain for everyone.

'Cause you're citing a vague and general character trait and claiming that because he's going to be written consistently he's now not worth writing about. Earlier you mentioned Batman as someone whom you do not believe to be such a stagnant character. But I can easily say "I can extrapolate how Batman will react to whatever situation because he has a core belief which is opposition to crime". Does that mean that Batman is stagnant to you?

No, I'm clarifying my answer. We can guess how Mengsk in WoL will act based on what we of him in SC1 and BW. The way he does actually turn out in Sc2 goes on to prove it.

If that's your clarified answer, I can't even begin to imagine what you think my question was. For your information, here it was:

The argument that a character should be removed because "you can extrapolate how he will act" is not very solid. By that standard, which character isn't pointless? Which character's action do you think I would be unable to extrapolate?

I have no clue what specific area you want my position on. You said this Mengsk stuff in WoL is off-topic, so I didn't know whether you wanted me to talk about that or the stuff in BW.

All I can really say is that it's not that unreasonable for people to think that Mengsk's position in WoL as being somewhat surprising.

You're entitled to be as surprised as you like. Why would you feel the need to tell me this?

In Brood War they destroyed a big chunk of the zerg swarm on Shakuras. In Brood War, they went around doing stuff (Artanis at Omega, Zeratul on Char, etc). You say that they're colonizing planets as if that's some massive achievement. Well no crap, that's the logical conclusion of 4 years of recovery, unlike Arcturus becoming the greatest terran power in the sector after getting so irrevocably decimated in BW.

A bunch of refugees transitioning to colonial expansion within four years = perfectly logical
The strongest Terran power in the Koprulu Sector still being the strongest Terran power in the Koprulu Sector four years later = unthinkable

I am unconvinced by your position.

When did I say completely intact? I said it's an empire he inherited from someone else. It's more than he had when it was the Sons of Korhal.


The UED also controlled all his colonies. I never said his empire was irreparably crippled, I said he's in a terrible position.


What kind of backwards logic is this supposed to be? Did you ever hear me say the Dominion is on par with the Confederacy?

If Mengsk was able to build the Dominion from the much more devastated Confederacy in months, it makes perfect sense that he can in years rebuild his own Dominion from the comparatively minor damage suffered through Brood War.

The KMC repelled a zerg invasion in BW.

I'd laugh but I fear that you might be trying to be serious here.

And given Mengsk's vast string of military defeats, they're in a way better position.

False. Otherwise provide evidence.

From the POV of the average citizen, I'd rather side with a faction that hasn't been attacked by zerg either (Umoja).

From the PoV of the average citizen, I'd rather side with a faction that has beaten back the Zerg and given us four years of peace.

Vague character motivations listed in an epilogue isn't evidence of anything, no matter how much you wish it to be. The protoss have improved because it's been 4 years, but Artanis hasn't rebuilt the protoss's glorious civilization in SC2 as promised.

Yes, all I have is a clear and simple quote from the game itself. While you have...

Wrong again: http://sclegacy.com/forums/showthrea...l=1#post182585

... baseless speculation. Truly I am amazed.

Still not sure you actually believe that. Here's your "evidence" again:


The epilogue made it a point to note how screwed over Mengsk is and how hard rebuilding will be for him.

It also makes a point of establishing that he is going to rebuild the Dominion, which is the actual relevant part. You know what the epilogue doesn't establish? Any Terran capable of competing with him. "If the game felt the need to [establish Umoja or the KMC as viable power groups], then you could make a claim. If the game says nothing, then you have nothing."

Look at the epilogue again and ask yourself which of the two are going to be a major power in the sector, because it sure as hell doesn't sound like the first guy! Yet remind me what the protoss accomplished in SC2 militarily again? Oh, that's right nothing. When you finally make the connection between that and the fact that we're complaining about Mengsk and not the protoss, you'll understand our argument a bit better.

"A plot revolving around Terrans featured the Terran powers, not the Protoss! This is somehow shocking to me!" Yeah, the Protoss didn't appear at all. "If the game felt the need to [establish the power of the Protoss], then you could make a claim. If the game says nothing, then you have nothing."

[Gradius]

I'd laugh but I fear that you might be trying to be serious here.

So claiming that Moria beat back the zerg is a huge joke, but when the Dominion gets decimated by the zerg multiple times they've "beaten back the Zerg and given us four years of peace" according to you. Awesome.

Love the double standards there. Good to know that we can make genuine progress. :P

A bunch of refugees transitioning to colonial expansion within four years = perfectly logical

They're not refugees. The dark templar have a civilization on Shakuras.

The strongest Terran power in the Koprulu Sector still being the strongest Terran power in the Koprulu Sector four years later = unthinkable

Ah, you mean the guy who kept getting trashed repeatedly and who's begging special interest groups to give him a fleet at the end of the game? That guy?

"If the game felt the need to [establish Umoja or the KMC as viable power groups], then you could make a claim. If the game says nothing, then you have nothing."

It did establish them as viable power groups. They rivaled the Confederacy. Read the manual.

Are you seriously giving me crap for pointing out that a faction's mere presence on the map doesn't mean anything about their power or size? You think that's the same as argument from ignorance? -_-

It also makes a point of establishing that he is going to rebuild the Dominion, which is the actual relevant part.

It says nothing about him rebuilding the Dominion. It just says he has plans. Not the same thing. And remember: If the game felt the need to [establish that he was capable of rebuilding the Dominion], then you could make a claim. If the game says nothing, then you have nothing."

See, I can throw back quotes like a child too!

... baseless speculation. Truly I am amazed.

It's cool that I'm the only one providing mountains of evidence, while you get to handwaive it all away as "baseless speculation". In the meantime, a vague plan to rebuild in the epilogue is good enough to justify going from begging for a fleet to lording over the terran sector. But not for the protoss. Only for Mengsk, because that happens to fit your position.

"A plot revolving around Terrans featured the Terran powers, not the Protoss! This is somehow shocking to me!" Yeah, the Protoss didn't appear at all. "If the game felt the need to [establish the power of the Protoss], then you could make a claim. If the game says nothing, then you have nothing."

LOL. So what were they doing? In both the zerg and protoss campaigns they did nothing. There is nobody else to fight by process of elimination. In the meantime, the Dominion invaded and captured Char. But you believe that the protoss rebuilt their glorious civilization just as the epilogue promised? You believe they returned to full strength? ...to do nothing?

"If the game felt the need to [establish the power of the Protoss], then you could make a claim. If the game says nothing, then you have nothing."

It did establish the power of the protoss. Their high executor lost in battle to a terran rebel group.

It's cool that we've reached the part of the debate where you resort to argument from ignorance, and I resort to giving out all the evidence that proves that I'm right yet gets ignored.

[Turalyon]

The back and forth between you guys (Grad and FT) is amazing.

The thing that's sticking out at the moment for me is FT's known disapproval of the Protoss being weak. If one is so inclined to disregard any actual consequence or impact from Mengsk's military defeats, one wonders why one would be upset about the Protoss being treated as weak when you can just as easily disregard the actual consequence or impact of their military defeats, too. In that sense, the Protoss aren't really weakening but just hitting more roadblocks. They're facing constant adversity but getting through it by still existing and improving (they have to be improving in order to keep on existing). There's constant interest due to the amount of conflict they experience. What's there to be so upset about?

I can only guess it's because, at some fundamental level, there is a feeling of consequence that you feel the Protoss are actually being hard done by. It's the reason that explains the current issue with Mengsk. It's also my main concern about going into LotV in that I cannot see how the Protoss can, realistically (in context of what that universe has shown us so far) defeat a threat that is even greater than the Zerg (after either only winning at great cost if not losing outright all the time) without contrivance.

That was narrative relevance, not military relevance. You'll recall that at the time I wrote that review, I thought that Humanity was being set up as the stronger faction following the Protoss and Zerg mutual devastation at the end of StarCraft.

What we see later after Rebel Yell does not really inspire one to think the Terrans/Dominion would be very strong especially given Duke's terrible outings against the Zerg and Protoss. Besides, does it really matter whether we're talking narrative or military relevance? The Terrans were always treated as the weakest. It's perhaps why BW felt it needed another Terran presence in the UED to tackle the inherently weak K-sector Terran presence and to boost their profile. That the UED could beat the K-sector Terran presence is evidence on it's own that the K-Sector Terrans are both narratively and militarily insignificant.

Except StarCraft II makes it quite clear what happened. So unless there's reason to believe that this was a retcon, I don't see what we're arguing here.

It's about acknowledging that something in BW had some sort of consequence with it's passage. As I've said before, one can actually skip BW and go straight into Sc2 from Sc1 without being the wiser. Even though, I may dislike elements in a story, I would like some acknowledgement of things that happened before. Such that while I've railed against WoL in the past, I was strongly against cancelling out Kerrigan's deinfestation quickly as HotS did because it was the one and only thing of significant import that happened. It's the same with the sudden Zerg OP out of nowhere in BW after what was supposed to be a huge blow to the Zerg.

Perhaps you should read it. "...their victory cost them all but their lives" means that they had two things: they were victorious and they were alive. Brood War states that they must abandon Aiur - the very thing which they spent the entirety of StarCraft fighting for - or die, in other words they do not have victory, and trying to achieve it will mean that they will not be alive. How is that consistent with the epilogue?

The victory was at a cost! You can't ignore that part!

As to the "must abandon Aiur" part, it's really only at Zeratul's behest. He even says he "suggests" going to a place of "solace" (a place for comfort and consolation at a time of distress and sadness), not that they must run forever more and never look back. Not only that, Aldaris is confident that they can make their stand as they are. It could easily be taken that Zeratul intended to regroup at a staging area (Shakuras) before striking back out again - which would make sense with the epilogue given that it's hard to make a counterstrike when all you have are disparate lives and nothing but ruins to help.

You're demonstrating that Raynor's presence is a retcon. I'm not contesting this. It has nothing to do with Mengsk.

No, I'm establishing that what you are relying on as evidence is flimsy. How can you take one part of the same epilogue as being golden and not something else? How do you really know which part of it is solid and which parts are not?

He was clearly working against Raynor's interests when he freed him from that Confederate prison ship, yes. You're fishing here. Mengsk was not the primary antagonist of Rebel Yell, and you know this full well.

Fine, fine, not an antagonist in the traditional definition and probably not the best word to describe his narrative role. That he has to resort to manipulation to get people to do what he wants suggests that people won't help him if he were more open about why is doing what he is doing. In that sense, Mengsk is working against one's moral best interests.

You're the one who said you had no idea whether the writers intended for Mengsk to appear incompetent, and I'm just helping you find an answer. Why would the writers provide informed attributes about Mengsk's competence if they intended to make him appear incompetent?

For narrative convenience/currency in making him seem like a worthy villain to fight - when he really isn't. You're right in that I don't know whether they intended it or not, it's the just the plain fact that he is incompetent regardless of intention.

'Cause you're citing a vague and general character trait and claiming that because he's going to be written consistently he's now not worth writing about.

The flanderisation of what was once a vague, innocuous and general character trait is often reason enough to not continue with a character.

Earlier you mentioned Batman as someone whom you do not believe to be such a stagnant character. But I can easily say "I can extrapolate how Batman will react to whatever situation because he has a core belief which is opposition to crime". Does that mean that Batman is stagnant to you?

I didn't say Batman was not a stagnant character (he actually rather is). I said other people believe him not to be, which is why he's still around. As to the why, I can only assume that this is because of the depth of Batman's roster of villains. Each one brings out a different characteristic in Batman and with multiple permutations which helps bolster the general one-noteness of the character if it were observed wholly on its own.

If that's your clarified answer, I can't even begin to imagine what you think my question was. For your information, here it was:

The argument that a character should be removed because "you can extrapolate how he will act" is not very solid. By that standard, which character isn't pointless? Which character's action do you think I would be unable to extrapolate?

I was clarifying what I meant by extrapolation. But if you insist on an appropriate answer to your question, all I can honestly say is that the only characters that aren't pointless at this late stage of the story are the new ones (like Valerian) because all the old main Sc characters in Sc2 (Raynor, Kerrigan, Mengsk and Zeratul) are quite thoroughly uninteresting and spinning on their heels. Their presence seems like the writers are just capitalising on the familiarity of them as a brand name and the broad representations of their previous characterisations.

You're entitled to be as surprised as you like. Why would you feel the need to tell me this?

I don't know. This being a forum, I'd thought that people would generally be interested in other people's opinions? I must be naive to think that then?

[KaiserStratosTygo]

" but only because you have the benefit of hindsight in knowing that Raynor betrayed Mengsk"

That's not hindsight, that's foresight, if I were a military commander I wouldn't twist my moustache and tell my subordinates that essentially "I will rule the world!!"

If Mengsk didn't know that a blatant maniacal power grab would piss people off, then he he has Alzheimers, seeing as how he used this AGAINST the Confederacy

"So yes, it is hindsight to think Mengsk should've known better then."

He doesn't need to have hindsight to know that pissing people off creates rebels, like... um.. Mengsk himself for instance, a logical leader (which Mengsk was more or less up until New Gettysburg) would try to prevent history from repeating itself.


", but to the man himself (which was the perspective I was taking), the rant is not without context and certainly not without justification."

Then Mengsk is clearly insane because to anyone else but the most hardened zealous SoK member, that would sound like ramblings of a crazy tyrant.

"The KMC repelled a zerg invasion in BW. And given Mengsk's vast string of military defeats, they're in a way better position. From the POV of the average citizen, I'd rather side with a faction that hasn't been attacked by zerg either (Umoja)."

Wait.. they beat back the Zerg? I thought Kerrigan just left with the resources she gathered.

[Turalyon]

That's not hindsight, that's foresight, if I were a military commander I wouldn't twist my moustache and tell my subordinates that essentially "I will rule the world!!"

Once again, it's easy for you to say because you know how everything turns out. It's easy for us to make judgements on events in past history and say I would've done this or that better to prevent such a thing. This is a classic example of hindsight bias.

If Mengsk didn't know that a blatant maniacal power grab would piss people off, then he he has Alzheimers, seeing as how he used this AGAINST the Confederacy

He doesn't need to have hindsight to know that pissing people off creates rebels, like... um.. Mengsk himself for instance, a logical leader (which Mengsk was more or less up until New Gettysburg) would try to prevent history from repeating itself.

Of course Mengsk knows this. He also thinks he has everything under control and can get rid of Raynor easily at that particular point in time, if not at some later time. He did do this to Kerrigan after all.

Besides, why would a "blatant maniacal power grab" be the final tipping point after having experienced and accepted a blatant maniacal murder of millions on two separate worlds (Antiga and Tarsonis) prior to this? If Kerrigan had been rescued, there is the likelihood that Raynor may have still stayed at Mengsk's side and helped him become Emperor of the Dominion... Where was Raynor's sense of outrage then? Can you even begin to understand (not sympathise mind you) where Mengsk's frustration could be coming from when Raynor seemingly opens hostilities out of nowhere?

Then Mengsk is clearly insane because to anyone else but the most hardened zealous SoK member, that would sound like ramblings of a crazy tyrant.

If you want to equate sociopathy with insanity, feel free to make that value judgement, I won't stop or judge you.

Wait.. they beat back the Zerg? I thought Kerrigan just left with the resources she gathered.

I think Grad is equating the loss the KMC suffered as being insignificant (and as somewhat of a victory in a roundabout sort of way) in comparison/similarity to FT's claim that Mengsk's previous and numerous defeats being also somewhat insignificant to account for his appearance in Omega.

[FanaticTemplar]

So claiming that Moria beat back the zerg is a huge joke, but when the Dominion gets decimated by the zerg multiple times they've "beaten back the Zerg and given us four years of peace" according to you. Awesome.

That depends. Are you claiming that Kerrigan going to Moria, plundering them for all they're worth and infesting their people to be shipped off-world to fight the UED is an actual Kel-Morian Combine accomplishment, or that it's something the KMC could spin as a victory? Because if the first, then yes, it is a huge joke. If the latter, then you have to acknowledge that Mengsk fighting the Zerg over Char leading to four years of peace is also something that can be spun as a victory, and a much greater one at that, which you have consistently refused to do. So which is it?

They're not refugees. The dark templar have a civilization on Shakuras.

Artanis isn't a Dark Templar. But if you're talking about the Dark Templar now, then yes, I fully believe that the Dark Templar have rebuilt their once glorious civilisation over the last four years. It's barely been damaged.

Ah, you mean the guy who kept getting trashed repeatedly and who's begging special interest groups to give him a fleet at the end of the game? That guy?

"The strongest Terran power in the Koprulu Sector." You're trying to compare Mengsk to some nebulous ideal instead of what I actually brought up because you know full well there is never any indication at all that there is another Terran power capable of challenging him.

It did establish them as viable power groups. They rivaled the Confederacy. Read the manual.

Yes, let's read, why not? "In the decade since the end of the Guild Wars, the oppressive Terran Confederacy has stood unchallenged in its supremacy over colonial space." VERY FIRST THING ESTABLISHED IN THE CAMPAIGN.

"Unchallenged in its supremacy". Clearly, the Kel-Morian Combine - the challenge the Confederacy actually crushed to obtain that supremacy - doesn't rival the Confederacy. Now let's look at the manual. "It is rumored that the Combine actually supplies the Confederacy with fuels and resources. So great is their political influence, the Confederate forces have been banned from prosecuting the Combine for any potentially criminal action." Saying that the Confederacy is willing to turn a blind eye to Kel-Morian crimes and that they are therefore of equivalent power is like saying that Saudi Arabia rivals the United States of America in power - evidently untrue, and my quote confirms that. Furthermore, there's no evidence that whatever political influence the Kel-Morian Combine held over the Confederacy was retained within the Dominion. So no, the game does not establish them as a faction capable of challenging Mengsk for supremacy over the Terrans of the Koprulu Sector.

It says nothing about him rebuilding the Dominion. It just says he has plans. Not the same thing. And remember: If the game felt the need to [establish that he was capable of rebuilding the Dominion], then you could make a claim. If the game says nothing, then you have nothing."

Ah, but StarCraft II does establish that Mengsk rebuilt the Dominion, so I do have something. That's your problem. You're the one trying to demonstrate that there's a contradiction here, you're the one who needs to establish that Mengsk couldn't rebuild the Dominion. And remember, "If the game felt the need to [establish that he was incapable of rebuilding the Dominion], then you could make a claim. If the game says nothing, then you have nothing."

See, I can throw back quotes like a child too!

It's your quote, if you didn't want to be held up to that standard, you should have thought about it then. Now you know why I just let you go with it.

It's cool that I'm the only one providing mountains of evidence

Pretty sure that's me. The game is pretty clear about what Mengsk's going to be doing after Brood War. Meanwhile, you just speculate that because Mengsk has suffered some (comparatively minor!) defeats he has to lose his power. Just Mengsk, mind you, not the Kel-Morian Combine or the Confederacy or the Zerg or the Protoss, just Mengsk. Because that happens to fit your position. You have not even established half the things in your next sentence. Mengsk never begged for a fleet. The Protoss did rebuild. You just don't want to admit positions I've made quite clear.

LOL. So what were they doing? In both the zerg and protoss campaigns they did nothing.

Not being mentioned proves that a faction is powerless? Congratulations! You've just proved that the Umojan Protectorate and Kel-Morian Combine were powerless! What were they doing during StarCraft and Brood War?

But of course, I don't believe that. Someone not being mentioned doesn't prove that they are weak or strong. The games do mention the Protoss' strength though, with the Golden Armada. Which is more than those two Terran factions ever get.

It did establish the power of the protoss. Their high executor lost in battle to a terran rebel group.

What, like when Executor Tassadar lost to the Sons of Korhal? You're right, that does establish the power of the Protoss... and that poweris equivalent to the power they wielded at the beginning of StarCraft, so thank you for demonstrating that I was correct. The Protoss have rebuilt their once glorious civilisation, just like Mengsk rebuilt his Dominion.

It's cool that we've reached the part of the debate where you resort to argument from ignorance,

Did you just say that quoting you is an argument from ignorance? Because that was hilarious. I would not have had the audacity to say something like that .

The thing that's sticking out at the moment for me is FT's known disapproval of the Protoss being weak. If one is so inclined to disregard any actual consequence or impact from Mengsk's military defeats, one wonders why one would be upset about the Protoss being treated as weak when you can just as easily disregard the actual consequence or impact of their military defeats, too. In that sense, the Protoss aren't really weakening but just hitting more roadblocks. They're facing constant adversity but getting through it by still existing and improving (they have to be improving in order to keep on existing). There's constant interest due to the amount of conflict they experience. What's there to be so upset about?

Number of reasons. It doesn't follow from anything - the Protoss were almost annihilated in the battle for Aiur, but so were the Zerg, and the Terrans lost 9/13 worlds to the Zerg in the war's opening salvo. Yet in Brood War they're suddenly so ridiculously weak? Why? When did they suddenly get so much weaker? It's not because there is a feeling of consequence, it's because there isn't. Also, being so weak limits the ways they can interact with other factions. Their lives also perpetually depend on magical plot devices. It ruins the core symmetry of the Zerg and Protoss that I very much liked in StarCraft. It ruins their characterisation as this technologically omnipotent menace. Don't know where you get your 'constant interest' and 'conflict' from, they've been nearly entirely absent from the last three games, and The Stand was a glorified fetch quest. The only conflict there came from Kerrigan (a Zerg Terran) mind controlling one of their leaders, because it's not like the Protoss are supposed to be amazing powerful psychics or anything. It's been pretty awful. Honestly, I have no idea what this has to do with the subject at hand.

What we see later after Rebel Yell does not really inspire one to think the Terrans/Dominion would be very strong especially given Duke's terrible outings against the Zerg and Protoss.

Funny that you say that, since I saw the complete opposite. Duke's Alpha Squadron was considered a threat to the Zerg Swarm that was entirely congregated on Char. Even despite his defeat, he held out on Char for the rest of the game, still strong enough to engage the Fleet of the Executor, and ultimately returned to the Dominion alive. Compare that with what happened to half the Dominion fleet plus Raynor's Raiders (who also were on Char in Overmind, though they needed Tassadar's help to survive) in Wings of Liberty, at a time where Gradius insists that the Terran Dominion is actually overpowered, and you'll see that Duke did phenomenally well on Char.

Besides, does it really matter whether we're talking narrative or military relevance? The Terrans were always treated as the weakest. It's perhaps why BW felt it needed another Terran presence in the UED to tackle the inherently weak K-sector Terran presence and to boost their profile. That the UED could beat the K-sector Terran presence is evidence on it's own that the K-Sector Terrans are both narratively and militarily insignificant.

Ah, but we've discussed this before. The UED actually had to steal and recruit from the Koprulu Terran forces, I suspect that they might actually have been weaker than the Terran Dominion.

It's about acknowledging that something in BW had some sort of consequence with it's passage. As I've said before, one can actually skip BW and go straight into Sc2 from Sc1 without being the wiser.

Ah, but that's Brood War's own fault. That game undoes everything except the evacuation of Aiur and Dark Origins (both of which are retained in StarCraft II). It's Brood War that makes certain that nothing important happens during The Stand. It's Brood War that invents the Psi Disrupter then destroys it, overthrows Mengsk as leader of the Dominion then reinstates him, births a second Overmind and then kills it, invents the United Earth Directorate and then destroys everything they had in the Koprulu Sector. Mengsk's supposed crippling is just another one of those elements - if they wanted him to be crippled, they wouldn't have brought him out in force, gloating and threatening for the big finale. Wings of Liberty is not responsible for Brood War not having any consequences, that's Brood War's own fault. I agree with your complaints, but they've been misdirected. This is in contrast to something like Raynor's anger at Kerrigan. This is definitely something Wings of Liberty changed. And while I might not have a problem with it, I can understand people who do. But that's not the case with Mengsk. The end of the game clearly establishes that he's still top dog among the Koprulu Terrans.

The victory was at a cost! You can't ignore that part!

I didn't. The cost was "all but their lives". And I explained clearly how Brood War denied that. This is exactly what I just wrote.

As to the "must abandon Aiur" part, it's really only at Zeratul's behest. He even says he "suggests" going to a place of "solace" (a place for comfort and consolation at a time of distress and sadness), not that they must run forever more and never look back. Not only that, Aldaris is confident that they can make their stand as they are. It could easily be taken that Zeratul intended to regroup at a staging area (Shakuras) before striking back out again - which would make sense with the epilogue given that it's hard to make a counterstrike when all you have are disparate lives and nothing but ruins to help.

Except a fraction of inconsequential Zerg threatened to wipe them all out (plus the Dark Templar), so it's obvious that no, they didn't have a chance on Aiur.

No, I'm establishing that what you are relying on as evidence is flimsy. How can you take one part of the same epilogue as being golden and not something else? How do you really know which part of it is solid and which parts are not?

Because you can't discuss StarCraft if you consider StarCraaft an invalid source of knowledge about StarCraft. You're basically going full narrative solipsism here. You're building an argument on the foundation that it is impossible to know anything about StarCraft. That's madness.

Fine, fine, not an antagonist in the traditional definition and probably not the best word to describe his narrative role. That he has to resort to manipulation to get people to do what he wants suggests that people won't help him if he were more open about why is doing what he is doing. In that sense, Mengsk is working against one's moral best interests.

And using him as the major antagonist in Heart of the Swarm was a new role, and a new use for his character.

For narrative convenience/currency in making him seem like a worthy villain to fight

That makes no sense, why would they make him look incompetent if they wanted to make him look like a worthy villain to fight?

The flanderisation of what was once a vague, innocuous and general character trait is often reason enough to not continue with a character.

Flanderisation need not continue. Characters can be rehabilitated. And I would say that Mengsk in Wings of Liberty is a much better character than the one from Brood War.

I was clarifying what I meant by extrapolation. But if you insist on an appropriate answer to your question, all I can honestly say is that the only characters that aren't pointless at this late stage of the story are the new ones (like Valerian) because all the old main Sc characters in Sc2 (Raynor, Kerrigan, Mengsk and Zeratul) are quite thoroughly uninteresting and spinning on their heels. Their presence seems like the writers are just capitalising on the familiarity of them as a brand name and the broad representations of their previous characterisations.

Innnnnnnnnnnnteresting.

You're partially wrong and partially right. Mostly, the problem is that characters which aren't changing aren't necessarily bad. Roles need to be filled, and characters who have those established stories behind them are inherently more interesting than some random new guy. If Mengsk hadn't been the primary antagonist in Heart of the Swarm, it would have been some random nobody. If you're honestly telling me that you would rather have had Executor Nyon than Arcturus Mengsk, then you and I may never understand each other. That's especially a problem with villains mind you. It's no wonder that there was never a Confederate character in StarCraft, the notable antagonists - Mengsk, the Overmind, Kerrigan, Aldaris, Duran, DuGalle, they were all fleshed out because you had the opportunity to fight on their side (or they on yours) for a while, which is I suspect the main reason Amon is so laughable. Now, I actually do think that we got to explore the character of Raynor in a few new facets in Wings of Liberty, which is part of the reason I actually do like that game, but I agree that newer characters have fresh stories to tell. That's why I wish Tychus had been the PoV character for Wings of Liberty. That's why I wish Raynor and Kerrigan would have basically retired from main character position after that game, and someone else - I don't know, Zagara maybe? - had been the main character in Heart of the Swarm. But that doesn't mean that you remove those old characters, because they still fulfill useful roles. You still need to have The Man to rebel against, and why remove Arcturus if you're just going to put someone else in his place? I mean, that's what annoys me about the death of Aldaris - that guy still had an important role to fill in the Protoss stories, even though his development as a character was basically complete after The Fall. Raynor or Kerrigan can still be a valuable NPC in Horner's or whoever's fight against the oppressive Terran Dominion, that old veteran who's seen it all and used to know the Emperor personally. They just don't need to be the focus anymore.

I don't know. This being a forum, I'd thought that people would generally be interested in other people's opinions? I must be naive to think that then?

Fine, fine. I'm kinda in the middle of a twenty page argument, so I had expectations . Especially since you don't seem to agree with anything I say .

So... I dunno, do you want my opinion on what Stratos is talking about? Do you want me to rant about how Protoss have been horribly misused? Talk about my fanfiction sequel to StarCraft?

[Turalyon]

It doesn't follow from anything - the Protoss were almost annihilated in the battle for Aiur, but so were the Zerg, and the Terrans lost 9/13 worlds to the Zerg in the war's opening salvo.

Correction: Only the Overmind was annihilated, the remainder of the Zerg forces were still milling about. They didn't disappear the instant the Overmind died. Or are you now suggesting that it should've been like this?

Yet in Brood War they're suddenly so ridiculously weak? Why? When did they suddenly get so much weaker? It's not because there is a feeling of consequence, it's because there isn't. Also, being so weak limits the ways they can interact with other factions. Their lives also perpetually depend on magical plot devices. It ruins the core symmetry of the Zerg and Protoss that I very much liked in StarCraft. It ruins their characterisation as this technologically omnipotent menace. Don't know where you get your 'constant interest' and 'conflict' from, they've been nearly entirely absent from the last three games, and The Stand was a glorified fetch quest. The only conflict there came from Kerrigan (a Zerg Terran) mind controlling one of their leaders, because it's not like the Protoss are supposed to be amazing powerful psychics or anything. It's been pretty awful. Honestly, I have no idea what this has to do with the subject at hand.

But using your similar defense for Mengsk, the Protoss are not weak. It's only in your mind because they made the comeback at the end of Omega and will kill off Amon in LotV - which suggests they were not ridiculously weak at all and so there's nothing to worry about. They can keep coming back for more at any time, just like Mengsk can. They're just being constantly tested and are not really "limited" at all. This "reliance on plot device" shouldn't be an issue since you've already accepted the absurd comeback (in itself a plot device) of Mengsk as being Ok. As you've corrected me before - just because we don't see them, we can't assume they're weak... so they must be still strong then. How am I wrong with my interpretation of Mengsk being weak but your interpretation of the Protoss being weak is not?

Funny that you say that, since I saw the complete opposite. Duke's Alpha Squadron was considered a threat to the Zerg Swarm that was entirely congregated on Char. Even despite his defeat, he held out on Char for the rest of the game, still strong enough to engage the Fleet of the Executor, and ultimately returned to the Dominion alive. Compare that with what happened to half the Dominion fleet plus Raynor's Raiders (who also were on Char in Overmind, though they needed Tassadar's help to survive) in Wings of Liberty, at a time where Gradius insists that the Terran Dominion is actually overpowered, and you'll see that Duke did phenomenally well on Char.

If you want to define strength in terms of being able to survive being killed in almost every encounter (I say almost because he ended up dying afterall!), then sure, Duke is incredibly strong.

As to the comparison with half of the Dominion's fleet and Raynor's Raiders, didn't you handwave that as the fleet not having been inflicted any serious harm (what with all these BC's in orbit and how they dominate Char in HotS before Kerrigan retakes it)? I'm seriously getting confused...

Ah, but we've discussed this before. The UED actually had to steal and recruit from the Koprulu Terran forces, I suspect that they might actually have been weaker than the Terran Dominion.

I remember that discussion. It was an interesting notion that I pondered as a hypothetical but it is hardly transparent/obvious for the casual fan. I'm pretty sure that the general consensus would be that the UED were stronger than the Dominion from the get-go, even though it may be wrong. If the UED were so weak, why do they show up in Omega when they lost Korhal (if we are to assume that Korhal represents the overall supply chain the UED tapped into to use the K-sector Terran supplies) and their remaining forces in the defence of the neo-Overmind on Char? What makes them think they can win in Omega when they were beaten twice despite having the advantage in those previous two instances?

Ah, but that's Brood War's own fault...... I agree with your complaints, but they've been misdirected.
This is in contrast to something like Raynor's anger at Kerrigan. This is definitely something Wings of Liberty changed. And while I might not have a problem with it, I can understand people who do. But that's not the case with Mengsk. The end of the game clearly establishes that he's still top dog among the Koprulu Terrans.

This would be right if not for the fact that some people do think that BW had plenty of consequence.

I didn't. The cost was "all but their lives". And I explained clearly how Brood War denied that. This is exactly what I just wrote.

Not really. We only saw them run away/tactically retreat, not that they'd necessarily die should they have stayed. There's only the fear of that (them all dying if staying) not the actuality.

Except a fraction of inconsequential Zerg threatened to wipe them all out (plus the Dark Templar), so it's obvious that no, they didn't have a chance on Aiur.

Ah, but that's when the retcon begins in full force. Before we know that the Zerg on Shakuras are capable of this, we don't really know at that time whether they could stand a chance or not on Aiur.

Because you can't discuss StarCraft if you consider StarCraaft an invalid source of knowledge about StarCraft. You're basically going full narrative solipsism here. You're building an argument on the foundation that it is impossible to know anything about StarCraft. That's madness.

I'm just denying the weight of what you deem as solid evidence is all. You use the vagary of "planning" as solid evidence for something that is an assumption (that he can put this into effect), whereas on the other hand we have solid evidence from the same source of someone not appearing ever again but then actually does later on. Your "evidence" is therefore hardly convincing.

And using him as the major antagonist in Heart of the Swarm was a new role, and a new use for his character.

Arguably, this was already done in WoL... which revealed nothing new about him. And yet we have him again in HotS doing the exact same thing....

That makes no sense, why would they make him look incompetent if they wanted to make him look like a worthy villain to fight?

I'm glad you feel incredulous... The answer to this is simple, it's just plain bad writing.

Flanderisation need not continue. Characters can be rehabilitated. And I would say that Mengsk in Wings of Liberty is a much better character than the one from Brood War.

It was beating a dead horse and HotS pretty much confirmed this. If his character could've been resuscitated by Blizz (even despite all the stuff that Mengsk has become, I still believe he could be salvaged with some good writing) they wouldn't have killed him off out of mercy from the butchery that his character was going through.

Mostly, the problem is that characters which aren't changing aren't necessarily bad.

I fully agree... except Sc2 is a clear example of it being equivocally bad.

Roles need to be filled, and characters who have those established stories behind them are inherently more interesting than some random new guy. If Mengsk hadn't been the primary antagonist in Heart of the Swarm, it would have been some random nobody.

Well, at the time of Sc1, was not every character we came across "some random new guy"? And yet we were still able to love and (love to hate in some instances) these "nobodies".

If you're honestly telling me that you would rather have had Executor Nyon than Arcturus Mengsk, then you and I may never understand each other.

I prefer Nyon to Mengsk (just kidding).

I seriously drew a blank for a moment when I read "Nyon" and then laughed to myself as I remembered.

Nyon is one of the worst type of cypher "character" I've ever seen. He's just another example of the poor writing in Sc2 and stands in stark contrast to what Blizz was able to achieve in Sc1 with, what was originally, blank slate characters.

But that doesn't mean that you remove those old characters, because they still fulfill useful roles. You still need to have The Man to rebel against, and why remove Arcturus if you're just going to put someone else in his place?

Who says we need to have The Man to rebel against theme at all (or again as the case maybe)? Afterall, WoL's story doesn't seem to know which theme it wants to convey given that the premise was supposed to be about Raynor's fight against Mengsk but then relegates it to a side-event that has no significance and ends on a completely different tangent altogether.

Fine, fine. I'm kinda in the middle of a twenty page argument, so I had expectations . Especially since you don't seem to agree with anything I say .

I'm more than capable of agreeing as I'm probably more likely inclined to try and take your perspective compared to the others. Just think of my disagreements to your assertions as a test of your position.

So... I dunno, do you want my opinion on what Stratos is talking about? Do you want me to rant about how Protoss have been horribly misused? Talk about my fanfiction sequel to StarCraft?

Go ahead with either. It's a forum afterall.